As Supreme Grand Emperor of the Republicans, I agree that to handle the $1.5 trillion deficit, we will agree to raise taxes by $750 billion and you will agree to cut spending by $750 billion
Would you do it? What would you cut?
How many Republicans on the board think the Democrats will use the $750 billion to spend even more money if the take control of the House?
So… where’s the “why?”
I guess we’ll see as the thread progresses.
Why should the Democrats trust the Republicans not to lower taxes again?
Your premise needs some flushing out (or I’m too thick to understand it, a definite possibility I admit)…
Where is the $750B comming from that you’re talking about here:
“How many Republicans on the board think the Democrats will use the $750 billion to spend even more money if the take control of the House?”
No. The Republicans are malignant, irrational, dishonorable and corrupt, and can under no circumstances be trusted. I would make no deals whatsoever with them; there’s no point since they’ll just break their word the moment they can get away with it. Or before they can get away with it. Nor do they have any intention of reducing the deficit, or of doing anything else that will help the country or anyone else besides themselves and their wealthy cronies.
The military. By a factor of, say, ten or so.
What makes you think that the Democrats are the ones who spend indiscriminately? It was the Republicans who went out of their way to spend America into massive debt.
He does know thew Repubs talk fiscal responsibility to rope the weak minded in, while jacking the deficits up every time, doesn’t he?
If you cut 90% of the defense budget, that’s only $604 billion…you still have $146 billion to cut.
Which is why I’d raise taxes more than that. As long as we indulge our pathological refusal to make the wealthy pay their fair share, there’s no way we are going to get the debt down.
The tax increase. Cad is insinuating that if republicans allowed for a 750 billion dollar tax increase, the democrats would just add it to their spending rather than to pay down the debt.
Frankly, this OP seems like partisan baiting.
Don’t fight the hypothetical, man. The deal in the OP is that taxes get increased by $750B and spending gets cut by $750B.
Ah - I see.
Thank you Inner Stickler
As I said though; I’d never make a deal with them since there’s no point. They’d take the 740B cuts, insist that it all be in things like social services and law enforcement against the wealthy/corporations, then refuse to actually let the tax increases go through - or insist that it all goes on the back of the poor and middle class. Guaranteed. It’s like making a deal with a less honest version of the Devil; they will screw you over.
Tweren’t nothing, zoid.
In the hypothetical that’s set up in the OP; these hypothetical Republicans will let you cut anything you want that adds up to $750B and will actively raise taxes by $750B. We’re not talking about a real situation or real Republicans. The question asked is, assuming 100% compliance with the deal, if you have to cut $750B, what would you cut?
Well, the Devil is in the details isn’t it?
The OP is asking for $750 billion in taxes and $750 billion in cuts.
Whose taxes are being raised and who’s gonna feel the pinch?
It is ever the way of politicians and why nothing useful gets done.
EVERYONE has their favorite programs they do not want cut.
EVERYONE does not want to pay more taxes.
So politicians keep punting the ball to the future.
In my view the republicans want to pilfer all they can for their masters.
Democrats espouse more noble goals but they will bend over for their masters as well.
In the end there is little real difference between the two. They are merely arguing over who gets screwed first.
The “masters” are the people with the money…1% or less of the population running the show.
Add that up and we are fucked.
Bend over America. Hope you got some lube.
Military budget*, corporate welfare, agricultural subsidies. Badda-bing.
*(only by 20% or so; I regrettably have to admit that I do believe we keep some peace in the world with our bloated military, despite the occasional completely immoral adventure)
What are your numbers? Ok, so you’ve cut the Mil budget by 20%, saving $134B. If we get rid of all ag. subsidies, that’s what? Another $13B? So that’s still about another $600B to cut. I don’t know what programs you’re defining as “corporate welfare”, but I’d be surprised if there are $600B of them.
According to American Public Media 10% of the military budget is $541B
I see no such numbers at the page you link to, even though it’s named “numbers.”
I’m guessing the large numeric discrepancy GIGObuster implies involves a ten-year estimate, while I thought OP dealt with single-year numbers.
At Gigo’s link I clicked Intro and got a cartoon video. I clicked elsewhere and gave up when it started to load another cartoon or on-line game.